Opinion
March 25, 1952.
Dixon, DeJarnette Bradford, and A. Lee Bradford, Miami, for petitioners.
Nichols, Gaither Green, William R. Colson and J.B. Spence, Miami, for respondents.
Petitioner, Ruby Olive McGee was tried in the Court of Crimes of Dade County. At the trial petitioners produced an experienced court reporter and secured permission of the court to allow him to transcribe the proceedings of the trial. No objection to this procedure was raised. When the trial was completed the reporter transcribed his shorthand notes, delivered the transcription to petitioners and destroyed his notes.
The instant suit was brought by respondents against petitioners to recover damages for personal injuries. It stems from the same automobile accident as the criminal trial described in preceding paragraph. On petition of respondents the Circuit Court entered an order requiring petitioners to deliver to respondents their (petitioners') copy of the proceedings of the trial in the Court of Crimes for inspection to copy if desired. We are confronted with a petition for certiorari to quash the order of the Circuit Court directing petitioners to deliver respondents their copy of the record of the trial made in the Court of Crimes.
The point for determination is whether or not the trial court committed error in requiring petitioners to deliver respondents a copy of the record made of the proceedings in the Court of Crimes.
The record in question was not made by the official court reporter, but was made by an employed reporter of petitioners for their use in the personal injury trial. It was their work product and was never a part of the trial proceedings. The reporter was not sworn and was paid by petitioners. We think the question was concluded contrary to the contention of respondents in Cleary Bros. Construction Company v. Phelps, 156 Fla. 461, 24 So.2d 51; Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Allen, Fla., 40 So.2d 115; Wofford v. Wofford, Fla., 47 So.2d 306; Lang v. Harris, Fla., 54 So.2d 120; Miami Transit Co. v. Hurns, Fla., 46 So.2d 390; Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 67 S.Ct. 385, 91 L.Ed. 451.
In Miami Transit Co. v. Hurns, we pointed out the circumstances under which the record in question could be secured. The present case does not fall within any of the categories defined therein.
On authority of the cited cases, the petition for certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Trial Court is quashed.
It is so ordered.
SEBRING, C.J., and THOMAS and HOBSON, JJ., concur.